Via JMG: NOM Loses Again In Maine

NOM has lost yet another court battle to cloak the names of their donors in Maine.

Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said Thursday his group is disappointed in the ruling, but feels its arguments will hold sway with an appeals court. NOM will pursue an expedited appeal to the U.S. First Circuit Court in Boston, he said, because of the short time before the upcoming election season. Though Thursday's decision will delay NOM's plans for political activity in Maine, Brown said, the group is reviewing the decision to gauge a potential timeline for action. NOM plans activity in Maine both on behalf of candidates that support "redefining marriage," said Brown, and on candidates that support traditional marriage.

He declined to say whether NOM would be active in the state's governor's race, as well as the legislative races. Brown also expressed frustration at the legal hurdles spurred by what he called "frivolous" lawsuits filed by their political opponents, one of which, Californians Against Hate, asked the Maine ethics commission to investigate NOM. That group, one of the primary advocates for preserving California's gay marriage law that was repealed by voters there in 2009, questioned whether NOM raised more than $5,000 to directly repeal Maine's same-sex marriage law.

It's not a complete win for the good guys, however, as the judge also ruled some parts of Maine's campaign finance disclosure laws to be "unconstitutionally vague" and struck down the requirement that donations over $250 be reported within 24 hours.

Labels: campaign finance, hate groups, Maine, NOM

reposted from Joe

Via BoxTurtle: California marriages go civil

Timothy Kincaid

August 20th, 2010

Yesterday the California state assembly approved SB 906, which will make the following changes to California’s marriage law:

300. (a) Marriage Civil marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, established pursuant to a State of California marriage license issued by the county clerk, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute civil marriage. Consent must be followed by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing with Section 500).

and

400. Marriage Civil marriage may be solemnized by any of the following who is of the age of 18 years or older:
(a) A priest, minister, rabbi, or authorized person of any religious denomination. No person authorized by this subdivision, or his or her religious denomination, shall be required to solemnize a marriage that is contrary to the tenets of his, her, or its faith. Any refusal to solemnize a marriage under this subdivision shall not affect the tax exempt status of any entity.

The bill goes on to revise the rest of the law by replacing reference to “marriage” with “civil marriage.”
Officially this bill does nothing, but the symbolism is interesting. It says that the State of California isn’t interested in how your church defines marriage, only in the civil aspect. Further, it assures churches and clergy that they need not conduct any marriages that they don’t find appropriate to their faith, even though such assurances are unnecessary due to the US Constitution’s religious protections.
And the wing-nuts are furious.
You’d think that ensuring and emphasizing protection for clergy would be welcomed. But wing-nuts don’t want such protection; it distracts from their deceptive talking points. They want to be able to scare people into thinking that their church will be forced to conduct same-sex marriages and have discovered that most voters don’t really understand that the First Amendment already protects them. This revision would make it harder to lie.
As the Ruth Institute, the National Organization for Marriage’s college outreach, laments

The real intent behind this bill is to make it appear as though it eliminates one of the main objections to same-sex marriage, that it jeopardizes religious freedom, in what gay activists hope will be an effort to get gay marriage on the ballot in California in 2012. They think that doing this will make gay marriage seem more acceptable to the voters of California and make it easier for such an amendment to pass. The idea is that if this bill passes, they can claim that allowing same-sex marriage won’t have any affect on religious freedom.

And anything that makes it more difficult for NOM and their allies to deceive voters is a threat to their power. Going into a potential 2012 constitutional amendment to reverse Proposition 8 (assuming that this isn’t all resolved through Perry v. Schwarzenegger by then), they didn’t want to have to defend “civil marriage” or lose one of their biggest scare points.
The bill passed with support of virtually all Democrats along with two Republicans. It had previously passed the State Senate but will return for a concurrence vote before going to the governor for signature.

make the jump here to read the full article

Via Himalaya Crafts: Buddha's Teachings

 

He wrote nothing, but challenged fundamental Hindu teachings and belief in gods and goddesses. He taught that a person gains enlightenment by following the "Middle Path" between selfindulgence and self-mortification.
Buddha summed up his teachings in the Four Noble Truths:

# Life consists of dukkha, which encompasses suffering, anxiety, dissatisfaction, frustration, pain, and misery. All of life is sub-ject to change and decay.
# Dukkha is caused by a desire or craving (tanha) for material possessions or intellectual gratification, which does not last and is ultimately unsatisfactory.
# Escape from tanha (desire or craving) is essential for inner peace and tranquillity. By eliminating tanha, one eliminates dukkha (suffering, etc.)
# The path or way to escape from tanha is the Noble Eight-fold Path. These are not successive stages or steps to be followed in sequence, but should be practiced and realized simultaneously. The Noble Eight-fold Path consists of the following eight points:

• Right Understanding: Believing the Four Noble Truths.
• Right Intention: Renouncing worldly life.
• Right Speech: Abstaining from lies, slander, abuse, and idle talk.
• Right Conduct: Abstaining from killing, stealing, lying, committing adultery, and using intoxicants.
• Right Occupation: Avoiding questionable occupations.
• Right Endeavor: Striving for good and avoiding all that is evil or wicked.
• Right Contemplation: Controlling one's mind so that emotions, including joy and sorrow, do not disturb one's calm.
• Right Concentration: Developing the mind to heights beyond reason.

The goal of the Noble Eight-fold Path is nirvana, a term that is difficult, if not impossible, to define. The term literally means "extinction," as the flame of a candle is said to be extinguished. However, nirvana is not a state of total annihilation, except as an annihilation of tanha (desire or craving) and dukkha (suffering). Nirvana is not an intellectual concept referring to a place or state of existence.

Nirvana is enlightenment, an awareness beyond that which can be reached with the mind, senses and reason. It is the final, peaceful bliss.

Death does not mark the end of existence because nothing is permanent. Nothing is unchanging, eternal, or immortal, according to Buddhism.

The wheel is a well-known Buddhist symbol. As the wheel turns, so do the cycles of change. If anything is permanent in Buddhist thought, it is change.

A fundamental point of Buddhist thought is the anatman, or "no self." The Buddha rejected the Hindu teaching that the individual self or soul is really identical with Brahman, the impersonal Oversoul out of which all that exists has come. Buddhism rejects the Hindu idea that a soul is trapped in a body, but teaches that a person is made up of a "bundle" of five particles or "waves" which temporarily come together to form a "body." They are: form (the physical body), feelings, perceptions (transmitted by the sense organs), impulses, and consciousness. This bundle causes a person to falsely think of himself or herself as a separate individual self.

Since all of life is change, these waves eventually move apart and the "self" disappears. Buddhists talk of reincarnation, by which they mean these waves will eventually join together to form another "self." One can be reincarnated, if enlightenment is not achieved, in six lokas or places as non-human beings, humans, sub-deities, animals, hungry ghosts, or sent to hell, depending upon one's actions (karma) in this lifetime. The well-known book, The Tibetan Book of the Dead, speaks of events between death and reincarnation for all who do not achieve enlightenment. Still, Buddhists insist no "soul" or "self" is reincarnated into another body as in Hinduism. While rejecting Hinduism, popular Buddhism borrows ideas from Hinduism which causes an outsider to find inconsistencies within Buddhism.

Buddhism does not require an orthodox belief; a systematic theology such as is found in Christianity is absent in Buddhism.

Buddhists reject belief in a personal God, although Buddhists may borrow Hindu deities. In Mahayana Buddhism, the Buddha is deified and seen as a savior.

Via HRC:

Dear Daniel, Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. As this summer leads into the 2010 election season, it's not difficult to find examples of our system being complicated, gritty, messy and sometimes devastating-and equal reminders of why it is better than anything else we have ever tried. Thanks to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, corporations may contribute to certain political committees. As you have read in our action alerts and in the news, Target and Best Buy recently donated large sums of money to a Minnesota group supporting a strongly anti-LGBT gubernatorial candidate. Before making this contribution, both companies had excellent records of support for the LGBT community, scoring 100% on the Corporate Equality Index. Target has since refused to right its wrong, and Best Buy has not responded to our call to remedy its action.  What does this mean for our democracy? Well, for starters, a democracy is as good as the players in it-corporations or humans. These companies made the wrong choice; knowing our opponents, that contribution could go to a dishonest campaign full of scare tactics and attacks.  Fortunately, that is not the last word. This week, we announced that we will devote $150,000 of our own resources to help elect a pro-equality governor and legislature in Minnesota. Victory in these elections could put marriage equality within reach in the North Star State. Each campaign cycle becomes more expensive than the last. The cost of campaign ads drives fundraising higher and higher. In ballot measure campaigns, donors from across the nation often contribute. To ensure that the voting public has a clear understanding of who is behind each measure, many states have enacted disclosure laws. The laws don’t prevent anyone from exercising their free speech rights, but they do ensure that democracy is conducted in the light of day, and not by secret organizations lurking in the shadows.  Although the public overwhelmingly supports knowing who is paying for the campaign ad that they’re watching, proponents of anti-LGBT ballot measures don’t. The so-called National Organization for Marriage, which contributed the majority of funds in the campaign to dismantle marriage equality in Maine, lost its challenge to Maine’s disclosure law. This ruling was yet another rebuke to NOM's efforts to undermine campaign disclosure laws that preserve democracy by letting the public know who is behind the ads and campaigns.  Democracy is a competition among ideas and principles. If you believe in what you are asking someone to vote for, you can be honest. If you believe that people would vote with you if they knew who you were, then you could come out of the shadows. Our opponents' attempts to escape their obligation to be forthright speak more loudly than any ad that they finance. When Congress returns and as the campaign season moves forward, we will speak louder still. Joe Solmonese President, Human Rights Campaign

Via JMG: LadyJava Music Video for JavaZone (High quality)

Via JMG: Indian Pole Gymnastics

Via Servicemembers United:

Servicemembers United Announces Fall "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Lobby Day First Ever Military Partners Meeting Also Planned in Conjunction with Lobby Day FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 08/19/2010 WASHINGTON, D.C. - Servicemembers United, the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans, announced today that it will host another "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" lobby day for repeal supporters on Thursday, September 16, 2010. The fall lobby day, affectionately nicknamed "The Final Assault," will come at a critical time after the Senate reconvenes but before the chamber is expected to take up the repeal-inclusive defense authorization bill. Participants can register for the September 16th "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" lobby day at www.ServicemembersUnited.org. "This lobby day will be the last major opportunity for supporters of repeal to come to Washington, make the case for this amendment, and hold their senators accountable on this vote," said Alexander Nicholson, Executive Director of Servicemembers United and a former U.S. Army interrogator who was discharged under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "Lobbying for repeal is now a lot more complicated than simply saying 'support repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' so we want to be able to explain the nuances of the current situation to repeal supporters and arm them with the detailed information they need to hold their Senators accountable." During the lobby day, Servicemembers United will also host a first-ever meeting in Washington for military partners from around the country. Servicemembers United's Campaign for Military Partners initiative was created in 2009 to connect and support the partners of LGBT military personnel. Military partners who are interested in attending this meeting can register for this event at www.MilitaryPartners.org. The issue of military partners was also featured in the second web ad released by the Servicemembers United Action Fund today. The ad, which features a former naval intelligence officer and a Marine, also features the partner of an airman who was deployed to Iraq. The web and tv ads from the Servicemembers United Action Fund can be viewed at www.MilitaryReadiness.org.

Via JMG: Bull leaps into crowd in Tafalla Northern Spain 30 hurt

Walt Disney - Ferdinand The Bull - 1938

Via Courage Campaign:

Author Tom Dolby and his husband, Drew Frist, wrote the following message to the Courage Campaign community in the aftermath of the 9th Circuit stay of Judge Walker's historic decision striking down Proposition 8. Tom and Drew have been phenomenal supporters of our work, from funding Camp Courage to our Testimony campaign. Please read their very personal message below and help us build the "Courageous Families Photo Project" today. Thanks!

-- Rick and everyone at Courage

When we were married in Connecticut last year, we knew that the federal Prop 8 trial might change our lives in 2010. What we didn't know was that we would be anxiously awaiting the birth of twin girls, via a surrogate and egg donor.

So when we heard the news a few weeks ago that Judge Vaughn Walker had ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional, we were overcome by emotion. In that moment, we realized that by the time our daughters were born, our family might have the same rights and dignities as every other loving family in California.

Unfortunately, that possibility of equality is on hold yet again, following the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision to stay Judge Walker's ruling indefinitely.

Still, we know that this journey to marriage equality is just the beginning. And we know that if we want our daughters to be raised with the inherent belief that their family is no less important than anyone else's family, we need to change the way Americans think and feel about LGBT families.

We need to change hearts and minds. All of us -- LGBT and straight -- together. Starting now.

That's why we're inviting you to join the Courageous Families Photo Project today. Will you send us a picture of yourself or your family, just like the one of us at our wedding below? We'll add it to a nationwide body of evidence demonstrating the joys of full equality and countering the destructive power of discrimination. Your family photo may even be chosen to be featured prominently on the Courage Campaign's web site. Just click here to upload your photo now:

As we progress along this new journey of parenthood, with the joy and fear that every prospective parent feels, we've found ourselves wondering: Will our children feel that they are valued in the world, that their parents are just the same as any other loving couple?

We hope so. That's why we are supporting the Courage Campaign as it launches the next phase of Testimony: Equality on Trial -- an unprecedented online storytelling project to bring the Prop 8 trial into the lives of Americans and change the conversation about marriage equality across the country.

In the coming year, the Testimony project will collect your depositions in the form of videos, pictures and written submissions. Every two weeks, the Courage Campaign home page will feature a real family picture selected from those pictures submitted through the Courageous Families Photo Project. This campaign will demonstrate that no two families look alike, but all families share the common bonds of love and -- most importantly -- deserve equal dignity and respect.

All families are welcome in the Courageous Families Photo Project: LGBT or straight. Single or coupled. Legally married or not. Together for one month or 50 years. We are all in this together. Will you help to change the way Americans think about families by sending a picture of you or your family today? Just click here to upload your photo:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/CourageousFamilies

At our wedding celebration for family and friends in Sonoma, our celebrant quoted the activist Parker Palmer as saying, "There is often a tragic gap between what is and what could and should be. To live in this world, we must learn how to stand in the tragic gap with faith and hope."

We ask that you stand with us in faith and hope as we work to ensure a safe and loving society for all of our children.

Thank you for joining us in launching this special project.

Tom Dolby and Drew Frist 

Courage Campaign Institute is a part of the Courage Campaign's multi-issue online organizing network that empowers more than 700,000 grassroots and netroots supporters to push for progressive change and full equality in California and across the country. To get involved in the Courage Campaign Institute, visit "Testimony: Equality on Trial" -- our year-long campaign to bring the Prop 8 trial into the lives of Americans.

To power our campaign to defend Judge Walker's decision striking down Prop 8, please chip in what you can today:

Via JMG: The Lands of Sexuality

Via JMG: Mexico City Mayor Sues Catholic Cardinal Over Gay Marriage Accusations

Mexico City's Mayor Marcelo Ebrard has filed a defamation lawsuit against Cardinal Juan Sandoval after the cardinal told the press that Ebrard had bribed Mexico's Supreme Court justices to legalize same-sex marriage and gay adoption.

Sandoval made the allegations on Sunday during an event in Aguascalientes state. He also used a slur against gays while decrying the recent high court decisions that were called victories for the gay-rights community, as L.A. Times correspondent Tracy Wilkinson analyzes in this story. Church authorities were not backing down. Sandoval said Monday he would not retract his comments, and the archdiocese in Guadalajara later said it had proof of the allegations against the Supreme Court justices. Statements in support were issued from the archdiocese in Mexico City, while the Bishops' Conference of Mexico also said it supports Sandoval. In the secular institutional corner, the Supreme Court censured Sandoval's statements unanimously, and Ebrard issued a stark warning to the highest-ranking prelate of Mexico's second-largest city: "We live in a secular state, and here, whether we like it or not, the law rules the land," Ebrard said, according to La Jornada. "The cardinal must submit to the law of the land, like all other citizens of this country."

Earlier this month Mexico's Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriages performed in the nation's capital must be recognized in all 31 states. Last week the same court upheld the constitutionality of allowing gay adoption in Mexico City.

Labels: bigotry, Catholic Church, lawsuits, marriage equality, Mexico, Mexico City, religion

a reposted from Joe

ViaJMG: SAN DIEGO: 12 Activists Arrested In Marriage Protest At County Clerk's Office

A dozen activists were arrested today at a San Diego county clerk's office when they refused to leave without being issued marriage licenses.

On the day hundreds of gay and lesbian couples statewide planned to obtain their long-awaited marriage licenses, a crowd of about 50 people gathered at the county clerk's office Thursday to protest a federal judge's stay of a federal ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Three people were taken away in plastic handcuffs by sheriff's deputies early in the demonstration and an additional nine people were removed later. A deputy said they were detained for blocking access to a county office. Tony and Tyler Dylan-Hyde and at least one other couple came to the county clerk's office this morning at 8 a.m. asking to receive their marriage license. "We believe that county officials and the Attorney General have the authority and the obligation to allow marriage licenses to proceed based on both federal court findings and that Prop. 8 is unconstitutional and the governor's filings in Prop. 8 cases," Tyler Dylan-Hyde said. "We are asking you to do what's right."

According to the linked news story, those arrested had blocked the entrance of heterosexual couples with appointments to get licenses.

Labels: activism, California, marriage equality, San Diego

a repost from Joe

Via JMG: Australian Sex Party TV Ad - JerkChoices

Via Service Members:

Daniel, We've been working with SLDN's Susan LaBombard, who stopped by our home in Missouri last month, on an opinion piece that CNN.com published Tuesday. The piece tells the story of our son, Pfc. Barry Winchell, who was murdered 11 years ago at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.    Barry lived by the values of respect, selfless sacrifice, integrity and honor throughout his service in the Army. With the continued commitment of supporters like you who are working to repeal DADT, we can make sure that Barry's legacy of courage and love for country lives on. Thank you. -Pat & Wally Kutteles Murdered soldier's parents: Repeal 'don't ask, don't tell' Kansas City, Missouri (CNN) -- The coffee was brewing and we were just starting our day when the telephone rang the morning of July 5, 1999. It was a call that every parent prays never will come. The Army colonel was calling from Fort Campbell, Kentucky, where our son was based in the U.S. Army. A fellow soldier had attacked our son, Barry Winchell. He had been taken to a civilian hospital in Nashville, Tennessee. We raced to the Kansas City airport. When we arrived at the hospital, Barry was clinging to life. His face was unrecognizable. Contrary to what the colonel had said on the telephone, Barry had not been kicked in the head by the other soldier. He had been beaten with a baseball bat as he slept in the barracks. The doctor said he had irreparable brain damage and recovery was unlikely. Barry had been a victim of constant, vicious harassment after another soldier -- one of two involved in his murder -- started a rumor that he was gay. Continue reading by clicking here...                    Share Pat and Wally's story on Facebook and Twitter today! http://bit.ly/aIHbvw

JMG Vidcast #1

via JMG: HomoQuotable - Richard Socarides

"Can President Obama, who once supported gay marriage, only to oppose it now, change his position again? The answer is yes — and he in fact has no choice. People understand that most public officials who now support gay marriage once opposed it. It wasn’t until after they left office that Bill Clinton and Al Gore (and, most recently, Laura Bush) said that they favored marriage equality. As Nate Silver recently wrote on his blog FiveThirtyEight.com: “Does anyone really believe, in a country that is becoming close to evenly divided on gay marriage, that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Kerry are among the half who oppose it? “

"The sooner Obama changes his answer on this most important equal-rights issue of the day, the better off he will be. The Perry ruling provides the right opportunity to shift his emphasis and provide real leadership, reminding people that in this country, we look to the courts for direction on what our Constitution requires. It might also help the president’s popularity with those that elected him, and it puts him and his party on the right side of the equality question, where he, of course, belongs and presumably wants to be." - Former Clinton White House adviser Richard Socarides, writing for Politico.

Labels: Barack Obama, HomoQuotable, marriage equality, Richard Socarides

 

reposted from Joe

via JMG: Hate Group Vs. Hate Group!

The anti-gay Liberty Counsel wanted to be one of the hate groups arguing Prop 8. The anti-gay Alliance Defense Fund blocked their involvement, saying, "No fucking way, bitches. We're the only haters up in this here case." Protect Marriage even dissed the Liberty Counsel as the "extreme fringe" of the hate movement and "not part of the coalition that got Prop 8 passed."

And ever since Walker ruled, the Liberty Counsel's Matt Staver has been screaming about the lousy job the ADF did, whining that ADF didn't hate nearly hard enough during the case. Why, they never even said that dirty homos were doomed to eternal damnation!

"First was a misplaced idea of competition or domination of the case," he said. "And second, a desire to narrow the defense so as not to focus or even address the consequences of homosexuality and homosexual marriage." "We wanted to include that as part of our defense," he continued. According to Staver, the ADF "basically gave away the essence of the case, because they wanted to shy away from homosexuality and really were not willing to take the issue directly head on." The ADF wished to stipulate, he said, that counseling some homosexuals to change could be harmful, that homosexual partners form long and lasting relationships, and that homosexuality does not impair any area of life. Liberty Counsel was not willing to do so.

Regardless of the reason that the ADF opposed Liberty Counsel’s entrance, the attitude that the ADF wished to project towards the court was reflected in the witnesses they planned on calling: at least three seemed to think that homosexuality, in itself, was perfectly fine. Katherine Young and Paul Nathanson had been slated to testify before the court for the proponents of Proposition 8, but they were both withdrawn before they did so.

Advocates of same-sex “marriage,” however, used Young’s and Nathanson’s videotaped depositions to help bolster their own arguments. In Nathanson's deposition he stated that homosexuals can be good parents, while Young said in his videotaped testimony that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality and that homosexuals have the same potential and desire as heterosexual couples to raise children. In 2003, Katherine Young and Paul Nathanson wrote that although legalizing "same sex marriage is a bad idea" they only opposed "gay marriage, not gay relationships." "There's nothing wrong with homosexuality," they stated. "One of us, in fact, is gay."

Staver further bitches that none of the Liberty Counsel's suggested witnesses, all of whom were ready to testify about the inherent eeee-ville of teh gay, were ever contacted, much less asked to appear in court.

Labels: Alliance Defense Fund, HA HA HA, hate groups, infighting is funny, Liberty Counsel, Matt Staver, Proposition 8

reposted from Joe

Yes We Canberra - Old Spice parody

Via TBP: Which Supreme Court Justices Will Uphold Judge Walker's Ruling?

As I explained in my previous post, Judge Walker held that Prop 8 failed the easiest of constitutional tests, even though it perhaps deserved a much more difficult test.
In other words, he could have used a sledgehammer to test the Prop 8 brick, but he threw some jello at it and it collapsed. Which it deserved to do, because Prop 8 has no rational basis except for "we hate teh gayz," and that is not a "legitimate government interest."
Justices Scalia and Thomas, however, would definitely love to strike down Judge Walker's ruling with lighting and thunder. Not because they hate gays, but because they don't believe in using the Constitution's Due Process clause to invalidate laws unless it involves gun restrictions. They wouldn't use the jello test like Judge Walker does.
But there are nine justices on the Supreme Court. Five are needed for a majority. Do we have five?
Now, scientific studies show that there are 101 ways to eat jello. (That hilarious video after the jump.)
Our job is to figure out how each of the Supremes like their jello, and what that will mean for Judge Walker's opinion.
Continue reading "Which Supreme Court Justices Will Uphold Judge Walker's Ruling?" »